Reply to The Urbanist Cult

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "The Urbanist Cult"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The only reason why urbanists have become influential is because their message supports monied interests. There is no other reason. It is certainly not because it is popular nor is it about "racial justice"

Vast majority of Americans prefer not only the exurban to the urban lifestyle, including vast majority of Blacks. Even more hilarious, half of all people that live in urban areas prefer to leave for the exurbs.

These people and their agenda are very and deeply unpopular and thank god that the pandemic is likely to bury them.

[img]https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/ft_2021.08.26_bighouses_03.jpg?w=421[/img][/quote]

Monied interests? SFH NIMBYs have made hundreds of billions in wealth because of the lack of new housing. That's where the money is. Apartment dwellers are "monied interests" now?

LMAO.[/quote]

The monied interests are developers. They’ve made even more money than SFH owners. The only goal that urbanist policies support coherently is maximizing developer profit. Otherwise, it’s an intellectually inconsistent mess of propaganda and hot takes. [/quote]

Not even remotely true. Developers love the fat margins NIMBYs enable by artificially capping the supply of housing.[/quote]

Developers do a lot of artificial capping themselves. Just look at the tens of thousands and pipeline units, the units off the market, and the short-term rentals. When we address those units, I’ll be ready to start blaming NIMBYs. [/quote]

I didn't realize that developers are acting as a cartel. What's your evidence for your claim of collusion?[/quote]

I didn't say there was collusion. It's funny how urbanists always bring that up. Do you know something I don't? Guilty mind, maybe?  Collusion isn't the only mechanism that produces this outcome. Developers are all pretty much dealing with the same economics, so it's not surprising they would make similar choices. They all want to protect their existing returns, they all need to deliver high returns to investors, and low interest rates make it cheaper for them to sit on land than it would be for them to sit on land if interest rates were higher. There's clearly a market inefficiency where urbanists claim a shortage on the one hand but developers claim they're worried about a glut on the other. This is a great place for regulation to step in.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics